Patrick Kane embarrassed by drunk photos

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

come on now, he causes a scene where ever goes? A wee bit of an exaggeration there.

the cabbie incident is the only issue i have with him. judging him for any for any of his other party pics would make me nothing more than hypocrite. Im guilty of having too much to drink at both bars and parties where some very un-flattering and embarrassing pics coulda been taken. i also went to prom junior and senior year....which included a group of us partying it up in the back of a limo. Who am i to judge?

On a positive note...his partying incidents involve a cab, a limo, and walking. Atleast he didnt get behind a wheel.....something that i have done in my past of which im not proud to admit.

Menacing 20-somethings can be found all over youtube. search college parties, drunken fights, vandalism, or rioting and let me know if you find young adults doing far more worse things than Patty Kane.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

Not to mention being an NHL star means thousands of young kids are watching his every move. Being a role model may not be what Kane signed up for but that is just part of the deal along his NHL path. He actually has a soul and remorse for his actions ? Who knew ? Still a dirty a555 BlackHawk though.

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

Those pictures were taken the weekend of the frat party in Madison, Wisconsin...it was one long, weekend party.

http://www.metro.us/...very-frat-party

http://deadspin.com/...kend-in-madison

[Tortorella's Rant]

For starters, i'm rarely ever wrong. Let's just clear that up off the hop. I think and look things up before I speak or write.

Jeff Carter was a helper bee, he wasn't 'pivotal' in LA's success. In fact he scored slightly more goals per game in the regular season for Columbus than he did for LA after being traded. And as far as raising LA's goal totals, he added 1 goal in his last 5 games of the regular season. Hardly the scoring machine gearing up for the playoffs. And in the playoffs, he had 1 measly goal in the first 10 games, his first coming halfway during the 2nd round against STL. He did have a hat-trick in the 2nd game against PHX, which is great, but he has 0 goals in the next 3 games against them to finish them off. That's 4 goals in 3 rounds, 3 of which came in one game. He did better in the Finals, to his credit, scoring once in each of the first two games, and then twice in the final game. By the way, Dustin Brown had the first assists on both those goals in the final game, as well as a goal himself and was named 1st Star....showing you how much moreso actually pivotal Dustin Brown was, not only to that series, but, like I said previously, the entire playoffs for the Kings. Richards?, 4 goals in 20 regular season games and 4 goals in the entire playoffs....yeah big help to the goal scoring drought for the Kings for sure../sarcasm. At least he was more consistent in his assists than Carter though throughout the playoffs, again to his credit, which i'm not taking away from.

Again, you may want to actually compare them to Quick and Brown, in order to appreciate why the latter two actually deserve the label 'pivotal'. Brown of all league players in the playoffs was ranked 1st in Goals, Assists, Points, Plus/Minus, Short-handed Goals, Game-Winning Goals, and Quick was 1st in Save%, GAA, and Shutouts...and lost only 2 games in the first 17 games in the playoffs, and only twice let in more than 2 goals in the entire 20 games he played in. Now that's what you call 'pivotal'. Carter and Richards are what you call 'complimentary' in comparison.

On to Kane...

I don't care if Kane lit up Luongo umpteen times in one game. I'm not that petty to hold a grudge against a player simply because he puts up good point totals against the Canucks. If anything, I give that player a bit more respect as a Canuck-killer, a la Milan Hejduk. That's just an unsophisticated immature rationalization on your part about my critique on Kane's off ice behaviour.....you're really grasping at straws, in other words. And anyone who wears or wore a mullet in their 20's is and was a douche at the time, simply for thinking it's 'cool'. It's like people who play their car bass really loud at night in a quiet residential neighbourhood on a weekday that thinking that's 'cool'.....total douches. Kane is a total douchewad, for getting drunk in public and hanging out uninvited at a frat party like a 'bigshot' at 23 years old. He's probably gearing up for life as the 30 year old loser in line at the club rockin way too much Drakkar Noir and a gold necklace, trying to pick up 18 year olds......complete finger-point worthy laughing-stock douche-king of Narnia.

I'm not trying to break his balls over his cabbie incident so much as i'm pointing out to you, and so are the rest of the adults in the room, that he's showing a pattern of behaviour starting with the cabbie incident, which should have been his wake-up call, but wasn't and so we have another incident and example of his poor decision-making abilities. Is he that stupid, that he doesn't think for one second that if he gets passing-out-pissed-on-a-bar-stool that his image won't be taken and plastered everywhere? And that could not only embarrass him, but his team and teammates as well, on top of the other reports from 'Patty-Cakes Big Drunken Day Out'?? It's quite obvious he doesn't, because his behaviour and recklessness shows that he's a selfish and embarrassing Kane-stain on the collective tightie-whities of the Blackhawks organization.....and it's their own damn fault, as far as i'm concerned for not setting him straight after the first embarrassing incident two years ago. My dislike for him has nothing to do with his on-ice abilities nor his previous altercation/incident, which is very relevant, as signs of a pattern of continued behaviour, once again. First time, i gave him a pass, because he was much younger and it was his first real mistake....the second time he pulls a drunken stunt like this, isn't a mistake, it's called repetition.

And yeah, there is something wrong with being drunk in public.....it's illegal. Why don't you understand that?? And this guy was on a bender almost the entire day. If you think that's 'cool', then you're obviously very young still, and think alcohol abuse is awesome, and probably need to grow up just as much as Kane does. Anyways, if you don't 'get it' now, you're not going to, and i'm done wasting my time in helping you 'get it'. The seeming majority of the other people in this thread get it....i dunno, maybe you're just extra-thick headed, or are rockin' a mullet.

[skolozsy2]

You forgot on the floor, face down on a bar, the cup parade, and a baseball game

Nobody cares what you do or did. You don't make millions to represent a hockey team. Your teammates, coaches, and GM won't get bombarded with question after question about your off ice antics. Apples and oranges.

[Buddhas Hand]

Carter was pivotal in the Kings success. As was Richards. But ignore Carter's individual stats for a minute. Like I had mentioned, before he arrived the Kings were near the bottom of NHL scoring g/g. After the addition of Carter, the Kings had top three NHL goal scoring production meaning that they were averaging well over 3 goals a game. 3.33 goals a game. Kopitar AND Brown also saw a rise in their production as you might expect. Brown had 23 points in this 21 game span since Carter's arrival. Kopitar had 25 points in this 21 game span. Both are clearly producing at rate which they were not before. This is a FACT so look it up if you don't believe me. I have had this discussion before. So, wait, is this just mere coincidence the Kings offensive production sky rocketed or is it a fact that the Kings actually added another legitimate offensive threat forcing the opposition to spread their defensive responsibilities out and adapt to the Kings new offensive weapon? This makes sense and it is obviously supported by the numbers. Or look at it this way. Let's use our very own Canucks for example. When Daniel went down with his injury in 09-10 and when Henrik carried the team on his back and ultimately winning the Art Ross, there was this guy named Alex Burrows. This Burrows character had always been a force with the Sedins. A legitimate scoring threat with the Sedins. That's the hint: Sedins. Plural. When Daniel went down, Burrows production dipped BIG time where he only managed 9 points and two goals in those 18 games. Why? Because the opposition did not have to worry about Daniel and were able to shut down Burrows easily. Just like the opposition didn't have to worry about much of the Kings line up until the addition of Carter, boasting their second line and making it just that much more of a problem, as again is supported by the numbers.

And yes, as you pointed out Carter did have some consistency issues, but like I just said: still a legitimate scoring threat that you cannot ignore. The Kings having that threat on their second line forces the opposition to guard them closer. Keep an eye on them. Watch them. It opens up room for Brown and co. on the first line because the opposition knows they have an equally threatening line coming out after them. Evidently this translated to the playoffs where they were the highest scoring team. Carter and Richards have always played well together. As much as you won't want to agree, Carter played a helluva lot bigger role than you think despite what his numbers may actually say. And his numbers are quite good anyway, the only real issue was consistency.

I rest my case.

I'm not even close to grasping at straws. Perhaps it's specifically not you that holds a grudge against Kane, then again we can only take your word for it, but there are others here that without a doubt do. They wouldn't openly admit to their bias against him but they have it. There's enough evidence of people hating on him on here and on the Canucks facebook page going years back now. Again, you're taking the word of a bunch of intoxicated teenagers at a frat party. I wouldn't trust those morons to pour me a drink without spilling some of it. You don't think there is the slightest bit of possibilty that those morons are embellishing their story, or flat out lieing? Like I said, there's always three sides to a story. Perhaps Kane pissed them off being a loud obnoxious drunk. Of course there's nothing wrong with that and it was a house party, was it not? But whoever heard of someone embellishing a story to make someone that pissed them off look bad? Nonsense! As much as you think I'm rationalizing, you're just making assumptions with the whole 30 year old loser thing. Now tell us what you really think about him.

I don't need you to help me understand anything, douche. Not once did I approve of him being intoxicated in public. As your senior girlfriend BB often says .. reading comprehension! I stated frat party. He was drunk at a house party. There's nothing illegal with that. But if anything it was a misunderstanding as I was not aware he was intoxicated in public this time. I had not actually seen the pictures. I was simply speaking about the house party and I said I would have taken issue with it if he was doing something illegal. Evidently the cops didn't think it was that big a deal. Whatever.

[Ovech Trick]

Patrick Kane in reality: See that girl on the right? I bet you wish you had, AAAAAAWWWWWWWWW YYYYYYYYYYYYEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAA

[cdubuya]

Nothing wrong with going out and getting hammered. This guy is a womanizing cocky arrogant egotistical piece of crap. Read the deadspin article. He's a tool, like most other hockey players.

[Erik Karlsson]

Your sign in times said different.

[John.Tallhouse]

Bahahhaha...

size

[Bertuzzi Babe]

I don't ever sign out of CDC? I leave it on always.

EDIT: Isn't this discussion of his personal life? I thought this wasn't allowed on CDC!

[thema]

As you're not bothering to read your PMs so my response to you would not appear to be derailing the thread:

First: You obviously need to get out of General Hockey Discussion and Canucks Talk a little bit more.

Second: I said he should be embarrassed for the drunken pictures, I don't recall saying anywhere in that 4 word sentence that him drinking was bad. He should be embarrassed for having drunken photos taken of himself in public when he represents a multi-million dollar corporation no matter where he is or no matter what he is doing in public. It makes him look like an idiot and when you add in the reports of his behavior while drunk and during the picture taking.....well, not much more needs to be said, does it? Reading comprehension, dude, reading comprehension, it would serve you well. And how interesting that 9 others in the thread agreed with my sentiments yet I'm the only one you singled out. The lone female. How utterly special.

Third: Nice shot with the jab at the username. How old are you? I don't have to justify my username from 2003 to you or anyone else.

Speaking of 'chilling out'...perhaps you should take your own advice? Really, all this vitriol and personal attacking over 4 small, innocuous words that others have echoed as well only in a longer line of words?

On topic:

As I said back on page 1 "Good, he should be"

[Bertuzzi Babe]

...and you should be embarrassed by your user name.

[thema]

Why? It's been my username since 2003. As a noob you can be forgiven for not knowing that, I suppose. Once.

[Bertuzzi Babe]

So I guess you know no shame. Funny how you can lionize a guy who ended a guy's career with a criminal assault (possibly the most disgraceful on ice incident ever in NHL history) yet you get on your moral high horse when a favorite target for Canuck abuse parties it up in the off season. You and I both know that if this was some random player from a team that has no rivalry with the Canucks this thread wouldn't exist; it's just a bunch of butthurt, sore loser Canuck fans having a good two minute hate. Pathetic. I'm sure that you are fine with our superstar goalie advocating gambling (and indeed being a paid shill for the gambling empires in B.C.) as well. Think maybe he has a gambling problem? After all he has done nothing but play poker this off season. Is he "embarrassing the team" with his crazy gambling ways?

[Down by the River]

So I guess you know no shame. Funny how you can lionize a guy who ended a guy's career with a criminal assault (possibly the most disgraceful on ice incident ever in NHL history) yet you get on your moral high horse when a favorite target for Canuck abuse parties it up in the off season. You and I both know that if this was some random player from a team that has no rivalry with the Canucks this thread wouldn't exist; it's just a bunch of butthurt, sore loser Canuck fans having a good two minute hate. Pathetic. I'm sure that you are fine with our superstar goalie advocating gambling (and indeed being a paid shill for the gambling empires in B.C.) as well. Think maybe he has a gambling problem? After all he has done nothing but play poker this off season. Is he "embarrassing the team" with his crazy gambling ways?

[thema]

Moral high horse? You're reading far too much into what I've posted here. I'd feel the same way if it were a well-known soccer player, swimmer, bike racer, football player, tennis player, triathlete, long distance runner........etc.

[Bertuzzi Babe]

Sorry, I don't believe you for one second.

As for far too many of the rest of you this is the kind of nonsense thread that has given Canuck fans the reputation of being a bunch of sore loser whiners which is undeserved for the vast majority of us. I for one couldn't care less about Patrick Kane partying in the off season just like I don't care about Dustin Byfuglien's heinous careless boating charge (which everybody here still calls his "drunken" boating charge). Furthermore if I hear one more person say that Kane "beat a cabbie over 20 cents" I'm going to scream; Kane was locked in a cab against his will (which is illegal apparently) with his cousin (who was apparently the one who took serious umbrage with the cabbie) by a guy who had no cab license and indeed had no DRIVER'S licence (thanks to a couple of impaired driving convictions). If you're going to slander somebody at least get the basic facts straight.

P.S. I am in no way a fan of Kane the hockey player either. Skilled but flaky.

[Sharpshooter]

Carter was pivotal in the Kings success. As was Richards. But ignore Carter's individual stats for a minute. Like I had mentioned, before he arrived the Kings were near the bottom of NHL scoring g/g. After the addition of Carter, the Kings had top three NHL goal scoring production meaning that they were averaging well over 3 goals a game. 3.33 goals a game. Kopitar AND Brown also saw a rise in their production as you might expect. Brown had 23 points in this 21 game span since Carter's arrival. Kopitar had 25 points in this 21 game span. Both are clearly producing at rate which they were not before. This is a FACT so look it up if you don't believe me. I have had this discussion before. So, wait, is this just mere coincidence the Kings offensive production sky rocketed or is it a fact that the Kings actually added another legitimate offensive threat forcing the opposition to spread their defensive responsibilities out and adapt to the Kings new offensive weapon? This makes sense and it is obviously supported by the numbers. Or look at it this way. Let's use our very own Canucks for example. When Daniel went down with his injury in 09-10 and when Henrik carried the team on his back and ultimately winning the Art Ross, there was this guy named Alex Burrows. This Burrows character had always been a force with the Sedins. A legitimate scoring threat with the Sedins. That's the hint: Sedins. Plural. When Daniel went down, Burrows production dipped BIG time where he only managed 9 points and two goals in those 18 games. Why? Because the opposition did not have to worry about Daniel and were able to shut down Burrows easily. Just like the opposition didn't have to worry about much of the Kings line up until the addition of Carter, boasting their second line and making it just that much more of a problem, as again is supported by the numbers.

And yes, as you pointed out Carter did have some consistency issues, but like I just said: still a legitimate scoring threat that you cannot ignore. The Kings having that threat on their second line forces the opposition to guard them closer. Keep an eye on them. Watch them. It opens up room for Brown and co. on the first line because the opposition knows they have an equally threatening line coming out after them. Evidently this translated to the playoffs where they were the highest scoring team. Carter and Richards have always played well together. As much as you won't want to agree, Carter played a helluva lot bigger role than you think despite what his numbers may actually say. And his numbers are quite good anyway, the only real issue was consistency.

I rest my case.

I'm not even close to grasping at straws. Perhaps it's specifically not you that holds a grudge against Kane, then again we can only take your word for it, but there are others here that without a doubt do. They wouldn't openly admit to their bias against him but they have it. There's enough evidence of people hating on him on here and on the Canucks facebook page going years back now. Again, you're taking the word of a bunch of intoxicated teenagers at a frat party. I wouldn't trust those morons to pour me a drink without spilling some of it. You don't think there is the slightest bit of possibilty that those morons are embellishing their story, or flat out lieing? Like I said, there's always three sides to a story. Perhaps Kane pissed them off being a loud obnoxious drunk. Of course there's nothing wrong with that and it was a house party, was it not? But whoever heard of someone embellishing a story to make someone that pissed them off look bad? Nonsense! As much as you think I'm rationalizing, you're just making assumptions with the whole 30 year old loser thing. Now tell us what you really think about him.

I don't need you to help me understand anything, douche. Not once did I approve of him being intoxicated in public. As your senior girlfriend BB often says .. reading comprehension! I stated frat party. He was drunk at a house party. There's nothing illegal with that. But if anything it was a misunderstanding as I was not aware he was intoxicated in public this time. I had not actually seen the pictures. I was simply speaking about the house party and I said I would have taken issue with it if he was doing something illegal. Evidently the cops didn't think it was that big a deal. Whatever.

[EmployeeoftheMonth]

So I guess you know no shame. Funny how you can lionize a guy who ended a guy's career with a criminal assault (possibly the most disgraceful on ice incident ever in NHL history) yet you get on your moral high horse when a favorite target for Canuck abuse parties it up in the off season. You and I both know that if this was some random player from a team that has no rivalry with the Canucks this thread wouldn't exist; it's just a bunch of butthurt, sore loser Canuck fans having a good two minute hate. Pathetic. I'm sure that you are fine with our superstar goalie advocating gambling (and indeed being a paid shill for the gambling empires in B.C.) as well. Think maybe he has a gambling problem? After all he has done nothing but play poker this off season. Is he "embarrassing the team" with his crazy gambling ways?